please..don't flame. I'm just struggling to find a team that we're honestly better than in the NFL right at this moment.

It's not a pessimistic take, it's not one to whine of. We don't have a QB, We've got a lameduck head coach, and an offense that's just not there yet.

Now, this could all change by draft time, and maybe, who knows, somehow maybe Colt makes the leap to becoming a decent, Blackmon or Richardson goes AP/Fitz and helps this team out that much, or something truly bizarre happens. It's not out of the picture, just as it stands now, we're not even a .500 football team atm

I'm done with the flaming (and my apologies if I was a dick).

There aren't many teams that we're clearly better than, if any.

There are many teams that we're just about as good as (or should I say that are about as bad as us).

There are some teams that will have bad days. There are some teams that will lose key players. Do the Broncs scare you without Manning? Giants without the other Manning? Take any team that has a franchise/elite QB off their starting roster and see what happens.

You can't claim that the 2012 schedule is harder than the 2011 schedule based on how those teams did in 2011. What happens if the Steelers hit a bad patch and go 6-10? Giants suffer post SB fever and flounder at 7-9 (hardly hard to imagine since they were 9-7 last year)? Would you be shocked if any of the AFC West bombed? The "harder schedule" concept is, to me, illogical since the actual accumulated quality of the teams on it is unknowable. Schedules almost always hover around the median over a 17 game schedule.

So if the 2012 schedule ends up being about the same as the 2011 schedule, you have to look at the Browns themselves. Why were they 4-12 in 2011? New Coach, who sucked. Colt was bad in the new system. RB's were in and out, hurt most of the year. Not much in the WR dept. Bad bad bad play at RT. Inability to stop the run.

Let's say they draft Richardson at 4, Cordy Glenn or Jonathan Martin at 22, and maybe Hill at 37. Is that not a significant upgrade at RB from Hillis? Is it not safe to assume that the 1st rd RT will be more effective than Pashos? Would not another playmaking WR help that position?

In addition, isn't it safe to assume that Shurmur in his 2nd year will be a little bit better? That Colt, with a full offseason and better weapons, won't suck quite so much?

Thus, I find it illogical to assume the Browns will be worse than last year, a team that won 4 games and quite easily could've pulled out several others.

And that is why I find a 2 win assumption also illogical, just as illogical as a 9 win prediction. Believable, yes. But illogical.

Good God, how did we get so much worse than in 2010? Not that we were good then but at least things felt like they were going in the right direction.

Fuck, there might've been times in 2010 when it felt like they were improving, but the last 4 games of 2010 were much more depressing than the last 4 of 2011. At the end of '10, I'd already lost faith in Colt and realized the entire season was a complete waste b/c Holmgren moronically kept Dead Man Walking on as coach.

I just remember the Jets game that year and being legitimately excited about a game and feeling like we might really have something. I'll grant you that the last few games that year were awful, no doubt. It just amazes me how quick the hope died.

Good God, how did we get so much worse than in 2010? Not that we were good then but at least things felt like they were going in the right direction.

Fuck, there might've been times in 2010 when it felt like they were improving, but the last 4 games of 2010 were much more depressing than the last 4 of 2011. At the end of '10, I'd already lost faith in Colt and realized the entire season was a complete waste b/c Holmgren moronically kept Dead Man Walking on as coach.

I just remember the Jets game that year and being legitimately excited about a game and feeling like we might really have something. I'll grant you that the last few games that year were awful, no doubt. It just amazes me how quick the hope died.

I do often wonder what might've been had they pulled that game out. I was at that game - the excitement beforehand and during was unlike anything post-2007 Bills game. Tebow, I miss that. But alas, like 2007, it was a mirage.

I want that bad. I know that beggars can't be choosers, and I'd take any of the 3 to be good at this point. But a good Browns team would just be number 1 choice.

Wish that dream wouldn't be squashed one year. It's not a negative response. I want that though man. Enough Rebuilding. Get me a damn winner.

Swerb wrote:Go start a blog if you want to tell the world your incomprehendible ramblings.

Cerebral_DownTime wrote:I have a big arm and can throw the ball pretty damn far...... maybe even over those moutains. The Browns should sign me, i'll let you all in locker room to drink beer. Then we can all go out the parking lot to watch me do motorcycle stunts.

Good God, how did we get so much worse than in 2010? Not that we were good then but at least things felt like they were going in the right direction.

Fuck, there might've been times in 2010 when it felt like they were improving, but the last 4 games of 2010 were much more depressing than the last 4 of 2011. At the end of '10, I'd already lost faith in Colt and realized the entire season was a complete waste b/c Holmgren moronically kept Dead Man Walking on as coach.

I just remember the Jets game that year and being legitimately excited about a game and feeling like we might really have something. I'll grant you that the last few games that year were awful, no doubt. It just amazes me how quick the hope died.

I do often wonder what might've been had they pulled that game out. I was at that game - the excitement beforehand and during was unlike anything post-2007 Bills game. Tebow, I miss that. But alas, like 2007, it was a mirage.

I was at that game. The defense had completely gelled and was played better than the sum of its parts, and Colt absolutely looked like the real deal. Hitting guys in stride, Hillis playing smashmouth football.....I remember loving how young the team was, and imagining how much room there was to grow.

When they were driving down the field in the waning minutes, I was as confident as you can ever be in a Cleveland team that they were going to pull it out, TCE be damned.

That Chansi Stuckey fumble was a gut punch for the whole stadium.....then everything came apart at the seams.

Feh.

How was Colt so much more composed and capable looking in that offense? Was Hillis really the difference maker, or did the league just adjust to him?

Maybe the offense last year really was entirely too predictable because of the lack of OTA's and crappy receivers? Bleh. So many variables.

Check me out at Dawgsbynature, where I write stuff, or @twitter as Josh Finney.

Maybe teams just figured out how to play him, like they did with DA in 2007.

No, that can't be it.

I mean, if I was an opposing DC, I would double cover any reciever that comes through the zone right of the line of scrimage, from about 5 yards behind the line to 5 yeards beyond the line. Then I would put 3 guys on the running back. Any reciever on the left of center would be uncovered. Any receiver beyond 15 yards deep would go uncovered. That would never work, would it?

Last edited by mistero on Thu Apr 19, 2012 1:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.

mistero wrote:Maybe teams just figured out how to play him, like they did with DA in 2007.

No, that can't be it.

I mean, if I was an opposing DC, I would double cover any reciever that comes through the zone right of the line of scrimage, from about 5 yards behind the line to 5 yeards beyond the line. Then I would put 3 guys on the running back. Any reciever on the left of center would be uncovered. Any receiver beyond 15 yards deep would go uncovered. That would never work, would it?

Stack the line and dare Colt to beat you deep was Defense 101 last season. I want TR, but poor guy's gonna be running into a wall all year, no matter how good the OL becomes.

mistero wrote:Maybe teams just figured out how to play him, like they did with DA in 2007.

No, that can't be it.

I mean, if I was an opposing DC, I would double cover any reciever that comes through the zone right of the line of scrimage, from about 5 yards behind the line to 5 yeards beyond the line. Then I would put 3 guys on the running back. Any reciever on the left of center would be uncovered. Any receiver beyond 15 yards deep would go uncovered. That would never work, would it?

Stack the line and dare Colt to beat you deep was Defense 101 last season. I want TR, but poor guy's gonna be running into a wall all year, no matter how good the OL becomes.

I dont think TR and a deep threat WR are mutually exclusive; they just need to make sure they get both. Getting out of the 2nd round without a speedster is going to make people in berea LOSE ERRR JERBS.

Check me out at Dawgsbynature, where I write stuff, or @twitter as Josh Finney.

mistero wrote:Maybe teams just figured out how to play him, like they did with DA in 2007.

No, that can't be it.

I mean, if I was an opposing DC, I would double cover any reciever that comes through the zone right of the line of scrimage, from about 5 yards behind the line to 5 yeards beyond the line. Then I would put 3 guys on the running back. Any reciever on the left of center would be uncovered. Any receiver beyond 15 yards deep would go uncovered. That would never work, would it?

Stack the line and dare Colt to beat you deep was Defense 101 last season. I want TR, but poor guy's gonna be running into a wall all year, no matter how good the OL becomes.

I dont think TR and a deep threat WR are mutually exclusive; they just need to make sure they get both. Getting out of the 2nd round without a speedster is going to make people in berea LOSE ERRR JERBS.

Neither do I, but even if you get Richardson, Cordy Glenn, and Hill, that stacked line barrier ain't gonna break until Colt shows them he'll make them pay for stacking it.*

*Again, a dis-endorsement for Colt McCoy, not an endorsement for Ryan Tannehill.

mistero wrote:Maybe teams just figured out how to play him, like they did with DA in 2007.

No, that can't be it.

I mean, if I was an opposing DC, I would double cover any reciever that comes through the zone right of the line of scrimage, from about 5 yards behind the line to 5 yeards beyond the line. Then I would put 3 guys on the running back. Any reciever on the left of center would be uncovered. Any receiver beyond 15 yards deep would go uncovered. That would never work, would it?

Stack the line and dare Colt to beat you deep was Defense 101 last season. I want TR, but poor guy's gonna be running into a wall all year, no matter how good the OL becomes.

I dont think TR and a deep threat WR are mutually exclusive; they just need to make sure they get both. Getting out of the 2nd round without a speedster is going to make people in berea LOSE ERRR JERBS.

Neither do I, but even if you get Richardson, Cordy Glenn, and Hill, that stacked line barrier ain't gonna break until Colt shows them he'll make them pay for stacking it.*

*Again, a dis-endorsement for Colt McCoy, not an endorsement for Ryan Tannehill.

I had some rebuttal for this, but forget it.....Colt sucks at throwing the deep ball. He might be able to do it here and there, but you're right.....until he does it regularly we're going to see the same ridiculously stacked line we have been.

Still think it's more on Shurmur to create opps than it is on Colt for not throwing it long.

Check me out at Dawgsbynature, where I write stuff, or @twitter as Josh Finney.